Ten oz

Conservatism insanity exhibit Alpha : Once Republican got control of the senate they made James Inhofe (Republican Senator from Oklahoma) the Chairman of the Senate Enviroment Committee. What are his qualifications for such a prestigious chairmanship? Well, he is the foremost Climate Change denier in the Senate. In 2012 he authored the book " The Greatest Hoax: How Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future". In his book Inhofe presents such evidence as "God is still up there" and "it is arrogance to assume we can undue what he has done". Recently Inhofe made news for throwing a snowball on the Senate floor to disprove Climate Change. Nominating a Climate Change denier as CHAIRMAN of the Senate ENVIROMENT Committie is like making Jordan Belfort (Wolf of Wall Street) the Chair of the Federal Reserve. It is insane. It also require a plurality of support within the party and not merely a fringe splattering. There is no Liberal equivalent to this sort of nonsensical execution of governance or rather outright disrespect of.

The Pauline Epistles are the earlier works espousing the Jesus. 14 of the New Testaments 27 books are attributed to Paul the Apostle. The Pauline Epistles is believed to have directly influence the Gospel of Mark which in turn is said to be the inspiration for the other 4 canonical gospels contained in the New Testament. So if we are looking for a possible culprit for a Christianity creator other than Jesus I think Paul is a reasonable possibility. Why wouldn't Paul how sought glory from himself? I seeing answering such a question as futile. It applies equally to every religion. Who invented Appollo and why didn't they seek glory? Why didn't Krishna's inventor this that or the other? What about Zeus? It would appear that religions are ever formed around the glory of mortals. When there have been mortals recieving glory it tends to be short lived. Jesus follows a typical trend which has not required any real person/god to have existed. Why would the story have been accepted? This too applies to every religion ever. In this specifc case adherence to the old testament had become untenable. Rules and interpretations can only be bent so far before something gives. In a newer era where Jews were inundated with other cultures, paganism, and greek mythology an evolution makes sense. An evolution is all Jesus was . Jesus is believed to be the messiah already previously prophesied and not something entirely new. Just as many Christians eventually left Catholicism and became Protestant many Jews became Christian. Evolutions are ongoing in religion. They respond to changing political climates, societal trends, and conditions. Of course known of the above proves or disproves a human Jesus existed. It is merely a response to the idea that the existence of Christianity in itself is definitive proof that Jesus must have existed.

@ Graeme M, the idea that animals is nature generally only kill out of necessity and that humans kill fand any more and often meaningless reasons has been made. Because this thread focus of scientific research involving animals and not hunting or other activities that result in the death of animals most posters are taking a cost vs gain view. I do not believe the human mind is being valued as greater but rather science and what can be gained is being valued as greater. A nebulous distinction perhaps but one that would probably still exist even if the expirements were being performed on humans.

And this is why context matters. I referenced rioting in my post and did not say violence never happened. MigL made the comparison to Northern Ireland and Israel/Palestine by asking if that was we (USA) was destine to go with the black community. That is the scale of violence being commenting on. Zapatos is doing his normal bait and switch by pretending my post claims something it doesn't. The civil rights movements were not paramilitary pushes. They were overwhelming peaceful and when violence did accord it was not organized or planned and often the result of provocation. @ Zapatos, in context what is inaccurate? You have latched on to "wide spread violence" but refuse to provide a definition or example. Violence has accorded but nothing at the level to which was being compared in the post I was responding to. The violence which has accorded was generally not the goal where as it often was and is amongst the conflicts compared IRA / Hamas. Riots are rather spontaneous events. They do not compare to the premeditated and organized nature of suicide bombing, kidnappings, govt assassinations, and etc.

Does this mean you aren't willing to define your version of widespread violence?

What is you definition of widespread violence? MigL referenced the IRA and Hamas. In 200yrs I think it is very accurate to say nothing comparable has exited in the Black community. Please educate me if I am missing episodes in U.S. where blacks strapped bombs to their chests and blown up resturants, bus stop, malls and etc. Where blacks form an army with tens of thousands of member to fight the U.S. government.

That is a leap. Throughout the United States struggle for equally minorities have been overwhelming peaceful. During slavery family were purposely separated, people were whipped, burned, handicapped, and in many cases lynched. Fast forward to the Jim Crow era and blacks were hit with clubs, bit by dogs, sprayed down by fire hoses, and in certian case lynched. Today blacks experience an incredible disproportionate imprisonment rate that strips millions of opportunity and equal standard of living. Blacks are generally no longer lynched but police still gun down teenagers in street and and policies like stop and frisk harass entire communities. Throughout the history of the push towards equality blacks have never resorted to suicide bombings, assassinating government officials, or any wide spread violence. The worst we have seen from the black community is broken convenient store windows and a scattering of injuries resulting from riots which have generally been started from aggressive police crowd dispersal. It greatly exaggerates the ongoning equality push in the United States to compare it to conflicts which have given birth to terrorism and armed insurrection. More people will drowned this year in the United States than will be killed in race roits or any sort of ongoing race war.

Is there "enough empirical" evidence? There is nothing contemporary, only two nonchristian references of which one is widely considered a fake, and the Gospels which were write later have unknown authorship and do not distinguish between Jesus & god. The best evidence presented thus far IMO has been presented by poster Eise. However I feel the argument relies too heavily on theology. That true history can be discerned with a reasonable level of accuracy from comparative analysis of the Gospels. If you are real interested in this discussion please read back through the thread some. Josephus and Tacitus' references, origin of various gospels, and the manner in which history is commonly proved have already been discussed at length.

^ Conservatives do a beautiful job creating false dichotomies. Foxnews attacks all other media not own by newscorp as liberal, Republicans in office use names like Democrat, liberal, left wing, Socialist, and even at times Fascist interchangeably. Everything is us vs them.

Societies are always looking back with a modicum of confused disbelief at the errors of the past. In real time people lived with slavery and thought it acceptable. Denied women the right to vote without considering it being bias or oppressive. Adult men use to marry young teenage girls and it wasn't considered perverse. Teachers use to hit student in class and so on and so on. Humans grow knowledge collectively over time. Every Individual's understand of the world is constrained by the environment they exist in. That is why the same people who wrote all men are created equal also owned slaves. Just as we look back at contradiction from the past future generation will do the same for us. However can we continue to destory our environment when the science data is so clear, why do we do so little to help starving poor nations, why is war still so often option number one, and etc. I am not sure any system of government could fix the problem. Majority vs minority actually aren't that different in most societies. They are far closer to each other on most all issues that humans a hundred years from now will be with either.

@ Pymander, when I started this thread I made it clear that I was referencing Jesus as a person. A living breathing human. Not Jesus as a supernatural entity. Your ongoing discussions about mystics and bibical prophecy might be better suited for its own thread. Archeological information and historical works (art, oral tradition, text) from antiquity as it relates to a historical Jesus what this thread is about. Edgar Cacye, Atlantis, and etc are fuel enough for there own debates. Feel free to start your own thread.

I have friends and relatives that use tobacco. That doesn't mean I can't have negative feelings about tobacco. Lots of people I care about make bad choices. Sometimes I make bad choices. Doesn't mean bad choices deserve respect. The perponderance of people who practice climate change denial doesn't add any legitimacy to the practice. Huge numbers of people believe in any number of silly things from ghosts to Bigfoot. Their numbers provide them no cover, no creditablity.

While education and training are always terrific things to have I think all that is really needed is for the ongoing oppression to stop. For example on average nationally blacks are 3.7 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana than whites and 10 times more likely to go to prison. An incredible disparity considering that blacks are no more likely to use. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/29/opinion/high-time-the-injustice-of-marijuana-arrests.html No group can succeed while being so clearly targeted. Rather than school grants and job training i rather see us stop making so many unemployable via our discriminatory legal system. At any given time 1 in 15 black males are in prison compared with 1 in 106 white males. 1 in 3 black males can expect to go to prison at some point in their lifetime. Blacks also receive longer prison sentences and are more likely to serve mandatory minimums than white offenders of the same crimes. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2012/03/13/11351/the-top-10-most-startling-facts-about-people-of-color-and-criminal-justice-in-the-united-states/

You are right but I think Pymander believes he is on topic.

The United States currently has the worlds largest prison population. Per capita the united states incarcerate black males at rates several times higher than any group experiences in the developed world. It is a modern humans rights issues. Comparing treatment of minorities around the world in the 1800's and 1900's is not useful. Here today abuses need to be acknowledges and action taken. That is not happening. Instead we get a false narrative that abuses existed in the past and we need to just learn from them and move on. We can not move on if we can not acknowledge the here and now. Beyond the prison system study after study reflects built in disadvantages for minority in everything from education to employment. We have tough thing to admit to today. Tough things to learn from today. This isn't merely about the past.http://www.salon.com/2015/03/04/10_ways_white_people_are_more_racist_than_they_realize_partner/

Tough to move on from a place that people deny they are at. Following the Civil Right Act starting in 1970 what has happen:"Since 1970, our prison population has risen by some 700% - an increase far outpacing rates of population growth and crime. To put this in context, between 1920 and 1970, our prison population only grew at roughly the same rate by which our general population grew." https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/massincarceration_problems.pdf That huge uptick has specifically effect one demographic far more than any other. This is a uniquely American issue. You referenced Europe as having a comparable history but Europe has no where near the per capita minority prison population the United States does nor does any European have anywhere near the number of police killings per capita. On women issues Germany just passed a law requiring cooperations to have women fill 30% of their board seats. Countries like France, Spain, and the Netherlands already have such laws in place. Comparing the united states to Europe is a bit of a false equivalency. In my opinion it is not about moving on and not making those mistakes again. It is about acknowledging that those mistakes are still being made and stopping.

@ EdEarl, I think it is a obvious issue. Eating more fruits and vegetables while reducing ones consumption of meat is healthier than vice versa. I doubt there are many nutritionist in the world who would disagree. It seems like much of the push back in this thread is partly preemptive. Posters want to nip the idea that vegetarianism or veganism is better in the bud but that argument gets started. Most of the meat eaten by people today isn't what hominids initially evolved eating. Most animal meats have a high potential of making humans sick if consumed raw. Beyond that humans don't have the jaw muscles or teeth to rip chunks from most animals. Certianly not the ones we consume today. Not until fire and cutting tools were our ancestors able to adopt the diet we have today. By then we were human. Beyond the physical health benefits fruits and vegetables are more efficiently produced. They require less land, energy, and water to produce. I think meat is here to stay for the foreseeable future. Just like there may be better ways to obtain the health benefits attributed to wine; wine is so delicious when it hits the lips that we would rather just accept a little liver damage. I think most people who have been forced by health issues to evaluate their diets eat more fruits & veggies and less meat.

The bridge between ethnicities because oneside has invested so much time and energy building moats. Things like woman suffrage and the civil rights act may seem like great victories but they are ones that were only neccessary because people were being extremely unreasonable in the first place. As iNow pointed out very few Republicans bothered to show up. That speaks volumes about about how unreasonable many still are.

@ Pymander, in your opinion what makes Edgar Cacye a creditable source of information?

In fairness to Jesus had he existed he never wrote anything down. At least not anything we are aware of. So he (Jesus) is possibly not the source of error. The Gospels are post contemporary third party writings that claim to have been inspired from oral traditions. So it is a group of anonymous authors who are contradicting each other.

In my opinion astrology is more akin to religion than science. Astrology as a discipline deals most directly with humans spiritually. There is not a defined mechanism for how universal alignment accomplishes its influence. Much like religions do not seek to explain how god creates. Rather they just state that god does. No scientific endeavors or goals are practiced. The only science involved is the technology used to observe and astrology is not credited as being responsible for the invention of that technology.

I do not know you but you are contemporary and responsive to me. The gospels are not.

Unknown origin is enough to consider them unreliable.

You can get that from multiple people quoting a single source but without knowing who those multiple people are or which source they are quoting very little can be ascertained. Mark is generally believed to be the first gospel written. It's authorship is unknown. Peter is believed to have influence both Mark, John, and to be responsible for the Pauline epistles yet Peter is not contemporary to a human Jesus. There is an arguement to be made that the one source may have been Peter as he was the most influential (Rock of my Church) in forming Christianity.

We know who is responsible for Einstein and Newton's work. Who wrote the gospels attributed to John?